Off the books
South Texas historically has been regarded as one of the worst places to get sued — or the best place to file a plaintiff’s lawsuit, depending on what side you’re on. That fact put the region on the American Tort Reform Association’s "judicial hellholes" list. But no more. The area is not on the most recent list. South Texas counties, from Cameron to Maverick and running north along the Gulf Coast, have long had the reputation for being friendly to people who wanted to file large product liability suits. That is why such multimillion-dollar lawsuits over such products as Ford Explorers, Firestone tires and most recently the arthritis drug Vioxx, look to the south even if the primary plaintiffs did not live in the area. Slowly but steadily, however, juries have started to render more reasonable decisions regarding liability, and the awards. Certainly, tort reform legislation designed to reduce the legal atmosphere that invited such lawsuits has helped, but local judges and juries have played their part in reducing the temptation for people to file lawsuits in the hopes of hitting a multimillion-dollar jackpot. To be sure, the threat of litigation remains a valid means of ensuring that companies act responsibly and do their best to market products that are of high quality and are safe to use. But just like the products and their use must be sensible, legal damages should also be reasonable, so that companies are encouraged to correct any errors and improve their products, rather than be driven into bankruptcy by exorbitant awards. The threat of huge awards only reduces research and innovation and keeps good products off the market. It appears that South Texas judges and juries are learning that truth, and rendering better decisions. For this they deserve praise.
